Bootz2004 wrote:She's actually right. It usually doesn't work out that way. Very easy to say in February "I think this class compares to that class" because there's nothing to prove you wrong yet. When you don't know much you can take that position because it's low risk at this point. Only time will tell.

Time will tell, but there are obvious parallels between Bosa/Ramsey/Elliott and Chubb/Fitz/Barkley. And I think the point here is that if you have the 7th pick, you're hoping for one of those guys.

2016 was a huge outlier to this point, because all five of the top five picks seem to have hit. I'm reasonably sure we could look at every draft EVER and not have that be the case. Like, every draft ever. Expecting that to hold again would be a losing proposition.

Also, even if that was your "top tier," and it was a good tier, consolation prizes could have included Ronnie Stanley, DeForest Buckner, Jack Conklin, Taylor Decker, and several other good/great/could be incredible still options.

The point is, it's likely not the end of the world if we end up outside of what we consider to be the "top tier."

If he's off the board there are 3 others that I'd be equally thrilled about at 7th overall. Nelson, Barkley, Fitz.

If the Bucs miss on all 4 of those prospects I want to trade down if at all possible.

Worst case scenario imho is drafting someone not in that group of 4 at 7th overall.

These informal groupings that develop...they usually don't end up meaning much. Remember 2012? There was a six-person top tier: Luck, RGIII, Richardson, Khalil, Blackmon, and Claiborne.

NO ONE had those last two on the same elite level as those other guys. They were just the "best at their position" in the draft class, and they are flashy positions so they get a bump. Even then, they weren't even unanimously the best at their spots either. And nowhere on the level of the other guys. In fact, the next closest was probably Kuechly, and not in hindsight.

MJW wrote:These informal groupings that develop...they usually don't end up meaning much. Remember 2012? There was a six-person top tier: Luck, RGIII, Richardson, Khalil, Blackmon, and Claiborne.

NO ONE had those last two on the same elite level as those other guys. They were just the "best at their position" in the draft class, and they are flashy positions so they get a bump. Even then, they weren't even unanimously the best at their spots either. And nowhere on the level of the other guys. In fact, the next closest was probably Kuechly, and not in hindsight.

Horseshit...Claiborne was being paraded around as the best thing since sliced bread...he was talked about as a "true cover corner" and not just an athlete like PP..

Doctor wrote:NO ONE had those last two on the same elite level as those other guys. They were just the "best at their position" in the draft class, and they are flashy positions so they get a bump. Even then, they weren't even unanimously the best at their spots either. And nowhere on the level of the other guys. In fact, the next closest was probably Kuechly, and not in hindsight.

Horseshit...Claiborne was being paraded around as the best thing since sliced bread...he was talked about as a "true cover corner" and not just an athlete like PP..

By what moron? I remember many (including myself) thinking Dre Kirkpatrick would actually be the better CB. Claiborne wasn't even thought of as a first rounder before his last season, but ended up having one good college year that many were suspect about. Scoring a 4 on the wonderlic didn't help. He was seen as a lock for the top 10, sure, but he wasn't in the elite group with the other guys. No way.

Super K wrote:Horseshit...Claiborne was being paraded around as the best thing since sliced bread...he was talked about as a "true cover corner" and not just an athlete like PP..

By what moron? I remember many (including myself) thinking Dre Kirkpatrick would actually be the better CB. Claiborne wasn't even thought of as a first rounder before his last season, but ended up having one good college year that many were suspect about. Scoring a 4 on the wonderlic didn't help. He was seen as a lock for the top 10, sure, but he wasn't in the elite group with the other guys. No way.

The moron's on this board (the old board actually). I remember it all too well because I was fanning hard for Trent Richardson. Like SK said Mo Claiborne was supposed to be the next Revis. Many called him a better corner than PP.

Doctor wrote:NO ONE had those last two on the same elite level as those other guys. They were just the "best at their position" in the draft class, and they are flashy positions so they get a bump. Even then, they weren't even unanimously the best at their spots either. And nowhere on the level of the other guys. In fact, the next closest was probably Kuechly, and not in hindsight.

Horseshit...Claiborne was being paraded around as the best thing since sliced bread...he was talked about as a "true cover corner" and not just an athlete like PP..

This. That was the top tier. I remember it clearly. There were those six guys, and they were going to go 1-6, and after that nobody knew who was going off the board. Everyone on the board was pretty shocked when we traded out of that group for this reason.

Doctor wrote:By what moron? I remember many (including myself) thinking Dre Kirkpatrick would actually be the better CB. Claiborne wasn't even thought of as a first rounder before his last season, but ended up having one good college year that many were suspect about. Scoring a 4 on the wonderlic didn't help. He was seen as a lock for the top 10, sure, but he wasn't in the elite group with the other guys. No way.

The moron's on this board (the old board actually). I remember it all too well because I was fanning hard for Trent Richardson. Like SK said Mo Claiborne was supposed to be the next Revis. Many called him a better corner than PP.

He was so well regarded we hired his college position coach that offseason.

Bootz2004 wrote:The moron's on this board (the old board actually). I remember it all too well because I was fanning hard for Trent Richardson. Like SK said Mo Claiborne was supposed to be the next Revis. Many called him a better corner than PP.

He was so well regarded we hired his college position coach that offseason.

Yep. And people used it as the reason why we'd draft him. I was called the usual names of course.

MJW wrote:It doesn't matter if Davenport is the 2nd or 3rd best "DE" prospect. That's irrelevant. That doesn't matter to anyone but the people who write the bullshit post-draft team grade blogs. And I don't like him because he's a defensive end. I don't believe in reaching. But I do believe in risk management. He has the physical tools to develop into one of the best 4-3 ends in the league. If you're giving me a 50% shot at a 15 sack end, I'm going to take that over a 75% shot at a Pro Bowl guard, because for the upteenth time, a guard's impact on an offense is limited. Otherwise, he'd be a tackle.

As for this BPA bullshit, Licht is clearly a BPA drafter. The result? It's been four years and we still can't rush the passer or cover anyone, because we keep drafting tight ends and safeties and scatbacks and linebackers because they're the "BPA." If you want to win the "Best collection of talent" bowl, good luck with that. I want to win football games. Until we get to the quarterback, that's not going to happen.

Interesting you mention this...the local hacks have Chris Landry on once a week (look him up).

A couple of weeks ago he made an interesting comment. He said (paraphrasing) that the Bucs had a lot of talent but weren't built well. It wasn't a "complimentary" rebuild. Don't know what that means...but an interesting comment...

We simply have a philosophical difference. I would NEVER take a guy who has a "shot" at being a "great" DE over a guy who is a "generational" OL. Guard or not. And by taking a risk on Davenport, you in fact DO believe in "reaching". You're percentages are pulled straight out of your ass.

What if your percentages were different? What if the likelyhood of Davenport turning into a 15+ sack guy were 10% and Nelson turning into an annual Pro Bowl LG 85%? My percentages mean just as much as yours. Where's your "risk management" now?

And before you kill Licht...ignore the Arguayo fiasco...look what he had to work with, when he got here. You people don't remember (or seem to forget), there was a plan in place upon his hire (this was even mentioned by Licht when Lovie was hired). 2 years to re-build the offense. 2 years to re-build the defense. When he arrived...we had nearly bupkis. That was the plan when Lovie took the job. The plan got shit-canned when Tedford "got sick". That doesn't mean the plan was wrong.

We had GARBAGE for talent 4 years ago. We were talent STARVED. NOBODY can argue that we haven't aquired talent since. Rome wasn't re-built in a day. It's convenient to poo-poo the organization when teams like LA and PHIL are so successful (seemingly) overnight. The facts are different but whateves. Think what you like.

Regardless...I take Nelson 100 times out of 100 over a project like Davenport. And i think MOST rational people would.

The part about us being talented but not built well is extremely accurate. We are built outside in as opposed to inside out. I'd love a beastly corner or shiny new RB as much as most, but if we don't fix the lines we're just pissing into the wind.

The Bears dont have a third round pick gut they have two fourth round picks. A third round next year and a fourth this year and I'll turn down better offers to move down even farther ------------------------- again maybe.

mdb1958 wrote:The Bears dont have a third round pick gut they have two fourth round picks. A third round next year and a fourth this year and I'll turn down better offers to move down even farther ------------------------- again maybe.

According to Walterfootball, our #7 pick is worth 1500..their number #8 is worth 1400..only a 100 point difference...

Switching places with them only equates out to getting their 4th rounder this year...we MIGHT be able to squeeze in them tossing in their 6th rounder too...

mdb1958 wrote:The Bears dont have a third round pick gut they have two fourth round picks. A third round next year and a fourth this year and I'll turn down better offers to move down even farther ------------------------- again maybe.

According to Walterfootball, our #7 pick is worth 1500..their number #8 is worth 1400..only a 100 point difference...

Switching places with them only equates out to getting their 4th rounder this year...we MIGHT be able to squeeze in them tossing in their 6th rounder too...

Getting both a 3rd and 4th is a pipe dream..

As time goes by, we will see how much clamor gets thrown at Nelson or the super Safety's. Its my point of view that counts not the Bears, if they wont give enough for me to move off of my pick, thats fine.

The 49ers aint moving up cheap either. The Raiders aint got squat unless they throw in a future too.

These picks are always so valued, "the best of the best" then points get thrown all around and suddenly they aint all that...